1
|
Nyamekye IK, Pullen BJ, Kelly N, Hayes W. Six Year Extension Study of Patients From a Randomised Clinical Trial Comparing Venefit, Radiofrequency Induced Thermal Therapy, and Endovenous Radiofrequency Ablation for Treatment of Incompetent Great Saphenous Veins. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2023; 66:94-101. [PMID: 36958479 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2023.03.021] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/19/2022] [Revised: 02/22/2023] [Accepted: 03/15/2023] [Indexed: 03/25/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare long term outcomes after great saphenous vein (GSV) treatment with three radiofrequency (RF) thermal devices: Venefit (Closurefast), Radiofrequency Induced Thermal Therapy (RFITT), and Endovenous Radiofrequency (EVRF). DESIGN A 72 month follow up of patients who were treated in the randomised 3RF study. METHODS A total of 172 participants from the 3RF study were invited to take part in a single visit, long term, follow up study. Failure of GSV closure was assessed with duplex ultrasound (DUS) and constituted the primary outcome. Patients completed questionnaires for secondary outcomes: Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire (AVVQ), Euroqol 5D (EQ-5D), and patient reported varicose veins measured by counting vein occupying boxes in AVVQ question 1. RESULTS Twenty-two patients (12%) had already been re-treated. Of the remainder, 13 (7%) could not be contacted, 20 (11%) declined invitation, and one did not consent. Therefore, 116 (64%) and 95 (53%) participants completed questionnaires and DUS, respectively. Failure of GSV closure on 72 month DUS was 16%, 21%, and 37% for Venefit, RFITT, and EVRF, respectively (p = .14), whilst outcomes for all failures were 14%, 17%, and 44% (p < .001) (Venefit vs. EVRF: p < .001; RFITT vs. EVRF: p < .001; and Venefit vs. RFITT: p = .63). There were no between group differences in AVVQ or EQ-5D scores. Rates of patient reported presence of any varicose veins were high for all groups (97%, 92%, and 97% after Venefit, RFITT, and EVRF, respectively; p = .48). The EVRF treated participants reported more extensive recurrence than the Venefit and RFITT participants (p = .008). CONCLUSION Long term technical outcomes after RF ablation for GSV varicose veins were significantly better after Venefit and RFITT compared with EVRF treatment. However, quality of life scores showed no differences after 72 months. Rates of patient reporting any varicose veins were high for all treatments. CLINICALTRIALS gov Identifier: NCT04720027.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Isaac K Nyamekye
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Worcestershire Royal Hospital, Worcester, UK.
| | | | - Nicolette Kelly
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Worcestershire Royal Hospital, Worcester, UK
| | - Wendy Hayes
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Worcestershire Royal Hospital, Worcester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
GCIG-Consensus guideline for Long-term survivorship in gynecologic Cancer: A position paper from the gynecologic cancer Intergroup (GCIG) symptom benefit committee. Cancer Treat Rev 2022; 107:102396. [PMID: 35525106 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2022.102396] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2022] [Revised: 04/23/2022] [Accepted: 04/24/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Long-term survivors of gynecological cancers may be cured but still have ongoing health concerns and long-term side effects following cancer treatment. The aim of this brainstorming meeting was to develop recommendations for long-term follow-up for survivors from gynecologic cancer. METHODS International experts, representing each member group within the Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG), met to define long-term survival, propose guidelines for long term follow-up and propose ways to implement long term survivorship follow-up in clinical trials involving gynecological cancers. RESULTS Long-term survival with/from gynecological cancers was defined as survival of at least five years from diagnosis, irrespective of disease recurrences. Review of the literature showed that more than 50% of cancer survivors with gynecological cancer still experienced health concerns/long-term side effects. Main side effects included neurologic symptoms, sleep disturbance, fatigue, sexual dysfunction, bowel and urinary problems and lymphedema. In this article, long-term side effects are discussed in detail and treatment options are proposed. Screening for second primary cancers and lifestyle counselling (nutrition, physical activity, mental health) may improve quality of life and overall health status, as well as prevent cardiovascular events. Clinical trials should address cancer survivorship and report patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for cancer survivors. CONCLUSION Long-term survivors after gynecological cancer have unique longer term challenges that need to be addressed systematically by care givers. Follow-up after completing treatment for primary gynecological cancer should be offered lifelong. Survivorship care plans may help to summarize cancer history, long-term side effects and to give information on health promotion and prevention.
Collapse
|
3
|
Wu CJ, Chan YN, Yen LY, Chen YH, Lo C, Tseng LM, Wang YJ. Extremity Exercise Program in Breast Cancer Survivors Suffering from Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy: A Feasibility Pilot Study. Healthcare (Basel) 2022; 10:688. [PMID: 35455864 PMCID: PMC9024995 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10040688] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2022] [Revised: 03/31/2022] [Accepted: 04/03/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To evaluate the feasibility of implementation of an extremity exercise program and to examine its preliminary effects in breast cancer survivors suffering from chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). SAMPLE & SETTING Thirteen breast cancer survivors from one hospital in northern Taiwan. Methods and Variables: A single group with repeated measures, and a quasi-experimental design. The intervention program was a four week, home-based extremity exercise program that was comprised of 10 skilled hand exercises and Buerger-Allen exercises. The Total Neuropathy Scale (clinical version), Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group, Neurotoxicity (13-Item Version), Identification Pain Questionnaire, and pain Visual Analogue Scale were used to measure CIPN before exercise (T1), during (T2~T4), and after exercise (T5). Qualitative data were also collected at each time point. Data were analyzed by using descriptive statistics, generalized estimating equations, and directed content analysis. RESULTS None of the participants reported adverse events during the study period. The extremity exercise program significantly improved patient-reported CIPN after intervention at T4 or T5 but was insignificant on clinician-assessed CIPN. The qualitative data of participant experience indicated that this program is feasible and easy to follow. CONCLUSION The extremity exercise program is feasible but needs to increase the sample size and prolong the intervention period for confirmation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chih-Jung Wu
- Department of Hematology and Oncology, China Medical University Hospital, No. 2, Yude Rd., Taichung 404332, Taiwan;
| | - Ya-Ning Chan
- School of Nursing, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 120 N. Medical Dr. Carrington Hall #CB 7460, Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7460, USA;
| | - Li-Yu Yen
- Research Nurse, Department of Internal Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Rm. 607, 6F., Laboratory Building, No. 1, Changde St., Taipei 10048, Taiwan;
| | - Yun-Hen Chen
- Department of Nursing, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, No. 201, Sec. 2, Shih, Pai Rd., Taipei 11217, Taiwan;
| | - Chyi Lo
- School of Nursing, China Medical University, No. 100, Sec. 1, Jingmao Rd., Taichung 406040, Taiwan;
| | - Ling-Ming Tseng
- Department of Surgery, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, No. 201, Sec. 2, Shih, Pai Rd., Taipei 11217, Taiwan;
| | - Ya-Jung Wang
- Department of Nursing, DaYeh University, No. 168, University Rd., Dacun, Changhua 51591, Taiwan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Tsai W, Zhang L, Park JS, Tan YL, Kwon SC. The importance of community and culture for the recruitment, engagement, and retention of Chinese American immigrants in health interventions. Transl Behav Med 2021; 11:1682-1690. [PMID: 33963414 PMCID: PMC8442562 DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibab053] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Chinese Americans experience cancer health disparities throughout the entire cancer continuum. Yet, they remain underrepresented in health research in part due to barriers in recruitment, engagement, and retention. This paper describes the strategies that we devised, by drawing upon our experiences with conducting two culturally sensitive cancer intervention studies, to help researchers improve their recruitment and retention rates of Chinese Americans in health research and address the gap in knowledge on intervention research with this population. The first study assessed the efficacy, adoption, and impact of an intervention, delivered by community health workers, to improve adherence to recommended stomach cancer prevention guidelines for at-risk Chinese Americans. The second study evaluated the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a culturally adapted version of the Expressive Helping intervention for Chinese American cancer patients and survivors. Our main recruitment strategies revolved around building community relationships, developing culturally sensitive materials, and establishing good first impressions with participants. Our main engagement and retention strategies focused on attending to cultural sensitivity, fostering relationships, and using technology. Harnessing the community's inherent strengths and prioritizing cultural understanding is crucial for culturally sensitive health research with Chinese Americans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William Tsai
- Department of Applied Psychology, Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, New York University, New York, NY, USA
| | - Liwei Zhang
- School of Social Work, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA
| | - James S Park
- Department of Medicine, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Yi-Ling Tan
- Department of Population Health, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| | - Simona C Kwon
- Department of Population Health, NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Morrison N, Gibson K, Vasquez M, Weiss R, Jones A. Five-year extension study of patients from a randomized clinical trial (VeClose) comparing cyanoacrylate closure versus radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of incompetent great saphenous veins. J Vasc Surg Venous Lymphat Disord 2020; 8:978-989. [PMID: 32205125 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvsv.2019.12.080] [Citation(s) in RCA: 57] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2019] [Accepted: 12/16/2019] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The proprietary cyanoacrylate closure (CAC) system vs radiofrequency ablation (RFA) trial (VenaSeal Sapheon Closure System Pivotal Study [VeClose]) showed that CAC, a nontumescent, nonthermal, nonsclerosant ablation technique, was effective and noninferior to RFA in vein closure with good 36-month outcomes. Conducted under a separate protocol, the aim of this extended follow-up was to assess the long-term safety and effectiveness of CAC and RFA for the treatment of incompetent great saphenous veins (GSV) at 5 years (60 months) of follow-up. METHODS This 60-month extension study was conducted for all patients who completed the randomized VeClose study and who were willing to participate. The pivotal VeClose study included patients with symptomatic moderate to severe varicosities (Clinical, Etiology, Anatomy, and Pathophysiology [CEAP] class C2-C4b) and symptomatic GSV incompetence who were randomly assigned (1:1) to either CAC or RFA. The primary outcome measure of this 60-month extension study was complete closure of the target vein, with planned exploratory analysis of noninferiority. Secondary outcomes included CEAP class; completion of the Venous Clinical Severity Score, EuroQol-Five Dimension survey, and Aberdeen Varicose Vein Questionnaire; patient satisfaction with treatment; adverse events (AEs) related to target GSV; and details of adjunctive procedures. RESULTS A total of 89 patients completed the 60-month visit, which included 47 from the CAC group, 33 from the RFA group, and 9 CAC roll-in patients. No new recanalization events have been observed in the groups between 36 and 60 months of follow-up. At 60 months, Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from recanalization in the randomized CAC and RFA groups were 91.4% and 85.2%, respectively, demonstrating noninferiority of CAC compared with RFA. Both groups demonstrated sustained improvements in EuroQol-Five Dimension and quality of life measures through 60 months. Whereas patients assigned to C0 or C1 clinical class were excluded from the original study, more than half of all returning patients (64% [57/89]) were now assigned to C0 or C1, suggesting an improved clinical class from baseline. Furthermore, 41.1% of returning CAC patients and 39.4% of returning RFA patients are presently at least two CEAP clinical classes lower than at baseline. No long-term device- or procedure-related serious AEs occurred in either group between 36- and 60-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS CAC and RFA were effective in achieving complete target vein closure of the GSV at long-term follow-up, with CAC demonstrating continued noninferiority to RFA. CAC was also associated with sustained improvements in symptoms and quality of life, lower CEAP class, and high level of patient satisfaction without serious AEs between 36 and 60 months.
Collapse
|
6
|
Reed SC, Bell JF, Miglioretti DL, Nekhlyudov L, Fairman N, Joseph JG. Fear of cancer recurrence and associations with mental health status and individual characteristics among cancer survivors: Findings from a nationally representative sample. J Psychosoc Oncol 2019; 38:125-142. [PMID: 31510882 DOI: 10.1080/07347332.2019.1649338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
Purpose: To describe the prevalence of fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) and test its associations with validated mental health status measures.Design: Cross-sectional survey using the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey Experiences with Cancer Survivorship Supplement.Sample: Post-treatment cancer survivors (n = 1032).Methods: Survey-weighted U.S. population-based estimates describe the prevalence of sociodemographic, health and mental health characteristics of cancer survivors by their level of FCR. Multinomial logistic regression was used to test associations of validated measures of mental health status and individual characteristics on levels of FCR in unadjusted models and those controlling for sociodemographic and health characteristics.Findings: Overall, 34.3% of cancer survivors reported no FCR, 54.4% reported low FCR, and 11.3% reported high FCR. Cancer survivors were at increased risk of reporting high FCR relative to no FCR if they had a low 12-item Short Form Health Survey Mental Component Summary score (≤48) compared to high scores (odds ratio = 2.88; 95% confidence interval = 1.57, 5.29). Reporting depressive symptoms or psychological distress did not significantly increase the risk of reporting high or low FCR relative to no FCR.Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study is the first to provide U.S. population-based estimates of associations between FCR and individual and health characteristics.Implications for Psychosocial Providers or Policy: Our results provide valuable information about which survivors are most at-risk for FCR. Future research is needed to more clearly differentiate FCR from other constructs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah C Reed
- Betty Irene Moore School of Nursing, University of California, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Janice F Bell
- Betty Irene Moore School of Nursing, University of California, Sacramento, CA, USA
| | - Diana L Miglioretti
- Division of Biostatistics, Department of Public Health Sciences, School of Medicine, University of California, Davis, CA, USA
| | - Larissa Nekhlyudov
- Harvard Medical School, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, CA, USA
| | - Nathan Fairman
- UC Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, UC Davis School of Medicine, Davis, CA, USA
| | - Jill G Joseph
- Betty Irene Moore School of Nursing, University of California, Sacramento, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Howells L, Hulbert-Williams NJ, Blagden SP. New challenges in psycho-oncology: Using drug development methodology to improve survivorship and supportive care intervention trials. Psychooncology 2019; 28:1362-1366. [PMID: 31106934 PMCID: PMC6619483 DOI: 10.1002/pon.5100] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/19/2019] [Revised: 04/10/2019] [Accepted: 04/18/2019] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
|
8
|
Rosenberg SM, Ligibel JA, Meyerhardt JA, Jacobsen ED, Garber JE, Nekhlyudov L, Bunnell CA, Nutting P, Sprunck-Harrild K, Walsh SK, Partridge AH. Developing a Novel Model to Improve Research and care for Cancer Survivors: a Feasibility Study. JOURNAL OF CANCER EDUCATION : THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR CANCER EDUCATION 2019; 34:229-233. [PMID: 29052110 PMCID: PMC5910291 DOI: 10.1007/s13187-017-1291-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
Despite a growing number of clinical trials and supportive care programs for cancer survivors, recruitment of patients for these opportunities during the survivorship phase of care is challenging. We piloted a novel process to systematically educate patients about available research studies and supportive care programs as part of a survivorship care visit. Between 3/2015 and 8/2015, patients seen in the Adult Survivorship Program who had not previously received a treatment summary and survivorship care plan (TS/SCP) were provided with one accompanied by a list of survivorship research studies and care programs tailored to their diagnosis. Survivorship providers discussed the opportunities and recorded whether the patient was interested in relevant studies and placed referrals to study staff. Following the visit, we tracked study enrollment and surveyed patients about their experience. Fifty of 56 (89%) pilot participants completed the survey. Almost all (98%) reported that the TS/SCP visit and document helped with knowledge of research opportunities and supportive care interventions. Following receipt of the TS/SCP, 44% were interested in at least one study and in further follow-up with research staff. Of the 30 survivors eligible for at least one study, 6 (20%) have enrolled in at least one study to date. This pilot program demonstrates that the systematic sharing of available clinical studies and supportive care programming as part of a survivorship care plan visit is feasible and well received by cancer survivors and may facilitate and enhance accrual to clinical trials in the survivorship phase of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shoshana M Rosenberg
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
| | - Jennifer A Ligibel
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Jeffrey A Meyerhardt
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Eric D Jacobsen
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Judy E Garber
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Larissa Nekhlyudov
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Craig A Bunnell
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Patricia Nutting
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
| | | | - Sarah K Walsh
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
| | - Ann H Partridge
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA, 02215, USA
- Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Tsai W, Zavala D, Gomez S. Using the Facebook Advertisement Platform to Recruit Chinese, Korean, and Latinx Cancer Survivors for Psychosocial Research: Web-Based Survey Study. J Med Internet Res 2019; 21:e11571. [PMID: 30632966 PMCID: PMC6329895 DOI: 10.2196/11571] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2018] [Revised: 10/17/2018] [Accepted: 10/23/2018] [Indexed: 01/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Ethnic minority cancer survivors remain an understudied and underrepresented population in cancer research, in part, due to the challenge of low participant recruitment rates. Therefore, identifying effective recruitment strategies is imperative for reducing cancer health disparities among this population. With the widespread use of social media, health researchers have turned to Facebook as a potential source of recruitment. OBJECTIVE We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of purchasing ads on Facebook to recruit Chinese, Korean, and Latinx cancer survivors residing in the United States. We assessed their experience with participating in a Web-based survey and their interest for future research. METHODS We showed 5 purchased ads in English, simplified Chinese, traditional Chinese, Korean, and Spanish on Facebook. Participants who clicked on the Facebook ad were directed to the study website and asked to submit their emails to receive the link to the 30-minute Web-based survey. Inclusion criteria included being of Asian or Latinx heritage, age ≥18 years, having a cancer diagnosis, and being within 5 years of cancer treatment. Participants who completed the survey were sent a US $10 Walmart eGiftcard. RESULTS The Facebook ads were shown for 48 consecutive days for a total spending of US $1200.46 (US $25/day budget). Overall, 11 East Asian and 15 Latinx cancer survivors completed the study, resulting in an average cost per participant of US $46.17. The East Asian and Latinx cancer survivors did not significantly differ in age, years lived in the United States, education level, generation status, and time since diagnosis. However, Latinx cancer survivors were marginally more likely to have limited English proficiency and lower annual income than East Asian cancer survivors. Both Latinx and East Asian cancer survivors reported that they enjoyed participating in this study and indicated an interest in participating in future psychosocial research studies. CONCLUSIONS The use of Facebook ads successfully resulted in the recruitment of East Asian and Latinx cancer survivors with different cancer diagnoses who reside in various geographic regions of the United States. We found that East Asian and Latinx cancer survivors recruited through Facebook were interested in participating in future psychosocial research, thereby providing support for the feasibility and effectiveness of using Facebook as a source of recruitment for ethnic minority cancer survivors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William Tsai
- Department of Applied Psychology, New York University, New York, NY, United States
| | - Daisy Zavala
- Department of Psychology, California State University San Marcos, San Marcos, CA, United States
| | - Sol Gomez
- Department of Psychology, California State University San Marcos, San Marcos, CA, United States
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Thong MS, Mols F, Doege D, van de Poll-Franse L, Arndt V. Population-based cancer survivorship research: Experiences from Germany and the Netherlands. J Cancer Policy 2018. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jcpo.2018.02.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
|
11
|
Lim CT, Roberts HJ, Collins JE, Losina E, Katz JN. Factors influencing the enrollment in randomized controlled trials in orthopedics. Contemp Clin Trials Commun 2018; 8:203-208. [PMID: 29696210 PMCID: PMC5898493 DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2017.10.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/05/2017] [Revised: 10/06/2017] [Accepted: 10/13/2017] [Indexed: 11/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Low enrollment rates are a threat to the external validity of clinical trials. The purpose of this study was to identify factors associated with lower enrollment rates in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving orthopedic procedures. Methods We performed a search in PubMed/MEDLINE for RCTs that involved any orthopedic surgical procedure, compared different intraoperative interventions, were published in English in a peer-reviewed journal between 2003 and 2014, and reported the numbers of both enrolled and eligible subjects. The primary outcome was the enrollment rate, defined as the number of enrolled subjects divided by the number of eligible subjects. We used a meta-regression to identify factors associated with lower enrollment rates. Results The combined estimate of enrollment rate across all 393 studies meeting inclusion criteria was 90% (95% CI: 89–92%). Trials in North America had significantly lower enrollment rates compared to trials in the rest of the world (80% vs. 92%, p < 0.0001). Trials comparing operative and non-operative treatments had significantly lower enrollment rates than trials comparing two different operative interventions (80% vs. 91%, p < 0.0001). Among trials comparing operative and non-operative interventions, there was a marked difference in enrollment rate by region: 49% in North America and 86% elsewhere (p < 0.0001). Conclusions RCTs investigating orthopedic procedures have variable enrollment rates depending on their location and the difference between the interventions being studied. North American trials that compare operative and non-operative interventions have the lowest enrollment rates. Investigators planning RCTs would be well advised to consider these data in planning recruitment efforts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Jamie E Collins
- Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA.,Orthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, BTM Suite 5016, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| | - Elena Losina
- Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA.,Orthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, BTM Suite 5016, Boston, MA 02115, USA.,Department of Biostatistics, Boston University School of Public Health, Crosstown Building, 801 Massachusetts Avenue, 3rd Floor, Boston, MA 02118, USA
| | - Jeffrey N Katz
- Harvard Medical School, 25 Shattuck Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA.,Orthopedic and Arthritis Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, BTM Suite 5016, Boston, MA 02115, USA.,Division of Rheumatology, Immunology and Allergy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02115, USA.,Department of Epidemiology, Harvard Chan School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02115, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Ganz PA, Romond EH, Cecchini RS, Rastogi P, Geyer CE, Swain SM, Jeong JH, Fehrenbacher L, Gross HM, Brufsky AM, Flynn PJ, Wahl TA, Seay TE, Wade JL, Biggs DD, Atkins JN, Polikoff J, Zapas JL, Mamounas EP, Wolmark N. Long-Term Follow-Up of Cardiac Function and Quality of Life for Patients in NSABP Protocol B-31/NRG Oncology: A Randomized Trial Comparing the Safety and Efficacy of Doxorubicin and Cyclophosphamide (AC) Followed by Paclitaxel With AC Followed by Paclitaxel and Trastuzumab in Patients With Node-Positive Breast Cancer With Tumors Overexpressing Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35:3942-3948. [PMID: 29072977 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2017.74.1165] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Early cardiac toxicity is a risk associated with adjuvant chemotherapy plus trastuzumab. However, objective measures of cardiac function and health-related quality of life are lacking in long-term follow-up of patients who remain cancer free after completion of adjuvant treatment. Patients and Methods Patients in NSABP Protocol B-31 received anthracycline and taxane chemotherapy with or without trastuzumab for adjuvant treatment of node-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive early-stage breast cancer. A long-term follow-up assessment was undertaken for patients who were alive and disease free, which included measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction by multigated acquisition scan along with patient-reported outcomes using the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI), the Medical Outcomes Study questionnaire, and a review of current medications and comorbid conditions. Results At a median follow-up of 8.8 years among eligible participants, five (4.5%) of 110 in the control group and 10 (3.4%) of 297 in the trastuzumab group had a > 10% decline in left ventricular ejection fraction from baseline to a value < 50%. Lower DASI scores correlated with age and use of medications for hypertension, cardiac conditions, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia, but not with whether patients had received trastuzumab. Conclusion In patients without underlying cardiac disease at baseline, the addition of trastuzumab to adjuvant anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy does not result in long-term worsening of cardiac function, cardiac symptoms, or health-related quality of life. The DASI questionnaire may provide a simple and useful tool for monitoring patient-reported changes that reflect cardiac function.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Patricia A Ganz
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Edward H Romond
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Reena S Cecchini
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Priya Rastogi
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Charles E Geyer
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Sandra M Swain
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Jong-Hyeon Jeong
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Louis Fehrenbacher
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Howard M Gross
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Adam M Brufsky
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Patrick J Flynn
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Tanya A Wahl
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Thomas E Seay
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - James L Wade
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - David D Biggs
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - James N Atkins
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Jonathan Polikoff
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - John L Zapas
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Eleftherios P Mamounas
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| | - Norman Wolmark
- All authors: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project/NRG Oncology; Reena S. Cecchini, Priya Rastogi, Jong-Hyeon Jeong, and Adam M. Brufsky, University of Pittsburgh; Priya Rastogi and Adam M. Brufsky, Magee-Womens Hospital; Norman Wolmark, Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA; Patricia A. Ganz, University of California at Los Angeles, Los Angeles; Louis Fehrenbacher, Kaiser Permanente, Vallejo; Jonathan Polikoff, Kaiser Permanente, San Marco, CA; Edward H. Romond, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY; Charles E. Geyer Jr, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VA; Sandra M. Swain and John L. Zapas, MedStar Washington Hospital Center, Washington, DC; Howard M. Gross, Dayton National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP), Dayton, OH; Patrick J. Flynn, Metro-Minnesota Community Clinical Oncology Program (CCOP), Woodbury, MN; Tanya A. Wahl, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA; Thomas E. Seay, Atlanta Regional CCOP, Atlanta, GA; James L. Wade III, Heartland NCORP, Decatur, IL; David D. Biggs, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE; James N. Atkins, Southeast Clinical Oncology Research Consortium NCORP, Goldsboro, NC; and Eleftherios P. Mamounas, Orlando Health, Orlando, FL
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Corsini N, Fish J, Ramsey I, Sharplin G, Flight I, Damarell R, Wiggins B, Wilson C, Roder D, Eckert M. Cancer survivorship monitoring systems for the collection of patient-reported outcomes: a systematic narrative review of international approaches. J Cancer Surviv 2017; 11:486-497. [DOI: 10.1007/s11764-017-0607-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2016] [Accepted: 02/14/2017] [Indexed: 01/23/2023]
|
14
|
Kunitake H, Russell MM, Zheng P, Yothers G, Land SR, Petersen L, Fehrenbacher L, Giguere JK, Wickerham DL, Ko CY, Ganz PA. Quality of life and symptoms in long-term survivors of colorectal cancer: results from NSABP protocol LTS-01. J Cancer Surviv 2017; 11:111-118. [PMID: 27562475 PMCID: PMC5269418 DOI: 10.1007/s11764-016-0567-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/17/2016] [Accepted: 08/09/2016] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Little is known about health-related quality of life (HRQL) in long-term survivors (LTS) of colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS Long-term CRC survivors (≥5 years) treated in previous National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trials were recruited from 60 sites. After obtaining consent, a telephone survey was administered, which included HRQL instruments to measure physical health (Instrumental Activities of Daily Living [IADL], SF-12 Physical Component Scale [PCS], SF-36 Vitality Scale), mental health (SF-12 Mental Component Scale [MCS], Life Orientation Test, and Impact of Cancer), and clinical symptoms (Fatigue Symptom Inventory [FSI], European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Colorectal Module [EORTC-CR38], and Brief Pain Inventory). A multivariable model identified predictors of overall quality of life (global health rating). RESULTS Participants (N = 708) had significantly higher HRQL compared with age group-matched non-cancer controls with higher mean scores on SF-12 PCS (49.5 vs. 43.7, p = <0.05), MCS (55.6 vs. 52.1, p = <0.05), and SF-36 Vitality Scale (67.1 vs. 59.9, p = <0.05). Multivariable modeling has demonstrated that better overall physical and mental health (PCS and MCS), positive body image (EORTC-CR38 scale), and less fatigue (FSI), were strongly associated with overall quality of life as measured by the global health rating. Interestingly, ability to perform IADLs, experience of cancer, gastrointestinal complaints, and pain, were not important predictors. CONCLUSIONS In long-term CRC survivors, overall physical and mental health was excellent compared with general population. Other disease-related symptoms did not detract from good overall health. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS LTS of CRC within the setting of a clinical trial have higher HRQL than the general population, and treatment regimens do not appear to be associated with any significant late effects on quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION NSABP LTS-01: NCT00410579.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hiroko Kunitake
- National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP)/NRG Oncology, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Marcia M Russell
- National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP)/NRG Oncology, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
- David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, 11301 Wilshire Boulevard, Mail Code 10H2, Los Angeles, CA, 90073, USA.
| | - Ping Zheng
- Department of Health Policy and Management, The University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Greg Yothers
- Department of Health Policy and Management, The University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- The University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- NRG Oncology, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | | | - Laura Petersen
- UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | - Louis Fehrenbacher
- Kaiser Permanente Oncology Clinical Trials Northern California, Vallejo, CA, USA
| | | | - D Lawrence Wickerham
- National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP)/NRG Oncology, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Allegheny Health Network Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
| | - Clifford Y Ko
- National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP)/NRG Oncology, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, 11301 Wilshire Boulevard, Mail Code 10H2, Los Angeles, CA, 90073, USA
| | - Patricia A Ganz
- National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP)/NRG Oncology, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- UCLA Schools of Medicine and Public Health and Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Sexton-Oates A, Dodgshun A, MacGregor D, Ludlow LE, Sullivan M, Saffery R. Evidence of broad-based family support for the use of archival childhood tumour samples in future research. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2016; 42:460-465. [PMID: 27165840 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2015-103141] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/17/2015] [Accepted: 04/18/2016] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This study aimed to determine the ability to successfully contact past paediatric patients and their families to request participation in research, to assess familial views on the use of previously collected archival clinical samples for research purposes, and to highlight the ethical and practical issues in obtaining this type of retrospective consent. METHODS To assess familial views on the use of such samples for research, we contacted a cohort of families with children previously diagnosed with a brain tumour to ask for consent to an epigenetic/genetic study. Examining participants' responses allowed us to gauge their opinions on the use of such tissue for research, and whether they would like to receive genetic information uncovered during research. RESULTS We were able to successfully contact 107 out of 178 families and found a significant positive correlation between year of diagnosis and ability to make contact. Of those families contactable that returned a consent form (75/107), 74 agreed to the use of their/their child's archival tissue in future research, and 70 of 74 requested notification should a gene change of potential clinical relevance be found. There were no differences in opinion between parents of living or deceased children or the patients themselves. CONCLUSIONS This study highlights the importance of time since diagnosis on the ability to make contact with previous patients and their families. When contactable, our data highlight the altruistic views of families towards the use of archival clinical samples for research purposes, irrespective of the outcome of their child's illness.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandra Sexton-Oates
- Department of Cancer and Disease Epigenetics, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Andrew Dodgshun
- Children's Cancer Centre, The Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Duncan MacGregor
- Department of Pathology, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia Department of Anatomical Pathology, The Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Louise E Ludlow
- Department of Cancer and Disease Epigenetics, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia Children's Cancer Centre, The Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Michael Sullivan
- Children's Cancer Centre, The Royal Children's Hospital, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| | - Richard Saffery
- Department of Cancer and Disease Epigenetics, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute, Parkville, Victoria, Australia Department of Paediatrics, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Arch JJ, Carr AL. Using Mechanical Turk for research on cancer survivors. Psychooncology 2016; 26:1593-1603. [PMID: 27283906 DOI: 10.1002/pon.4173] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2015] [Revised: 04/08/2016] [Accepted: 05/08/2016] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The successful recruitment and study of cancer survivors within psycho-oncology research can be challenging, time-consuming, and expensive, particularly for key subgroups such as young adult cancer survivors. Online crowdsourcing platforms offer a potential solution that has not yet been investigated with regard to cancer populations. The current study assessed the presence of cancer survivors on Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) and the feasibility of using MTurk as an efficient, cost-effective, and reliable psycho-oncology recruitment and research platform. METHODS During a <4-month period, cancer survivors living in the United States were recruited on MTurk to complete two assessments, spaced 1 week apart, relating to psychosocial and cancer-related functioning. The reliability and validity of responses were investigated. RESULTS Within a <4-month period, 464 self-identified cancer survivors on MTurk consented to and completed an online assessment. The vast majority (79.09%) provided reliable and valid study data according to multiple indices. The sample was highly diverse in terms of U.S. geography, socioeconomic status, and cancer type, and reflected a particularly strong presence of distressed and young adult cancer survivors (median age = 36 years). A majority of participants (58.19%) responded to a second survey sent one week later. CONCLUSIONS Online crowdsourcing represents a feasible, efficient, and cost-effective recruitment and research platform for cancer survivors, particularly for young adult cancer survivors and those with significant distress. We discuss remaining challenges and future recommendations. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanna J Arch
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
| | - Alaina L Carr
- Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Gustafsson E, Litström E, Berterö C, Drott J. Reliability testing of oxaliplatin-associated neurotoxicity questionnaire (OANQ), a pilot study. Support Care Cancer 2015; 24:747-754. [PMID: 26137985 DOI: 10.1007/s00520-015-2838-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2015] [Accepted: 06/22/2015] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- E Gustafsson
- Department of Surgery and Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, 581 85, Linköping, Sweden
| | - E Litström
- Department of Surgery and Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, 581 85, Linköping, Sweden
| | - C Berterö
- Division of Nursing Science, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, 581 85, Linköping, Sweden
| | - J Drott
- Department of Surgery and Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, 581 85, Linköping, Sweden.
- Division of Nursing Science, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, 581 85, Linköping, Sweden.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Drummond FJ, Kinnear H, Donnelly C, O'Leary E, O'Brien K, Burns RM, Gavin A, Sharp L. Establishing a population-based patient-reported outcomes study (PROMs) using national cancer registries across two jurisdictions: the Prostate Cancer Treatment, your experience (PiCTure) study. BMJ Open 2015; 5:e006851. [PMID: 25888474 PMCID: PMC4401862 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006851] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/10/2023] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To establish an international patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) study among prostate cancer survivors, up to 18 years postdiagnosis, in two countries with different healthcare systems and ethical frameworks. DESIGN A cross-sectional, postal survey of prostate cancer survivors sampled and recruited via two population-based cancer registries. Healthcare professionals (HCPs) evaluated patients for eligibility to participate. Questionnaires contained validated instruments to assess health-related quality of life and psychological well-being, including QLQ-C30, QLQ-PR25, EQ-5D-5L, 21-question Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) and the Decisional Regret Scale. SETTING Republic of Ireland (RoI) and Northern Ireland (NI). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES Registration completeness, predictors of eligibility and response, data missingness, unweighted and weighted PROMs. RESULTS Prostate cancer registration was 80% (95% CI 75% to 84%) and 91% (95% CI 89% to 93%) complete 2 years postdiagnosis in NI and RoI, respectively. Of 12,322 survivors sampled from registries, 53% (n=6559) were classified as eligible following HCP screening. In the multivariate analysis, significant predictors of eligibility were: being ≤59 years of age at diagnosis (p<0.001), short-term survivor (<5 years postdiagnosis; p<0.001) and from RoI (p<0.001). 3348 completed the questionnaire, yielding a 54% adjusted response rate. 13% of men or their families called the study freephone with queries for assistance with questionnaire completion or to talk about their experience. Significant predictors of response in multivariate analysis were: being ≤59 years at diagnosis (p<0.001) and from RoI (p=0.016). Mean number of missing questions in validated instruments ranged from 0.12 (SD 0.71; EQ-5D-5L) to 3.72 (SD 6.30; QLQ-PR25). Weighted and unweighted mean EQ-5D-5L, QLQ-C30 and QLQ-PR25 scores were similar, as were the weighted and unweighted prevalences of depression, anxiety and distress. CONCLUSIONS It was feasible to perform PROMs studies across jurisdictions, using cancer registries as sampling frames; we amassed one of the largest, international, population-based data set of prostate cancer survivors. We highlight improvements which could inform future PROMs studies, including utilising general practitioners to assess eligibility and providing a freephone service.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - H Kinnear
- Northern Ireland Cancer Registry, Centre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - C Donnelly
- Northern Ireland Cancer Registry, Centre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - E O'Leary
- National Cancer Registry Ireland, Cork, Ireland
| | - K O'Brien
- National Cancer Registry Ireland, Cork, Ireland
| | - R M Burns
- JE Cairnes School of Business and Economics, National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
| | - A Gavin
- Northern Ireland Cancer Registry, Centre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK
| | - L Sharp
- National Cancer Registry Ireland, Cork, Ireland
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Aaronson NK, Mattioli V, Minton O, Weis J, Johansen C, Dalton SO, Verdonck-de Leeuw IM, Stein KD, Alfano CM, Mehnert A, de Boer A, van de Poll-Franse LV. Beyond treatment - Psychosocial and behavioural issues in cancer survivorship research and practice. EJC Suppl 2014. [PMID: 26217166 PMCID: PMC4250535 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejcsup.2014.03.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 133] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
The population of cancer survivors has grown steadily over the past several decades. Surviving cancer, however, is not synonymous with a life free of problems related to the disease and its treatment. In this paper we provide a brief overview of selected physical and psychosocial health problems prevalent among cancer survivors, namely pain, fatigue, psychological distress and work participation. We also address issues surrounding self-management and e-Health interventions for cancer survivors, and programmes to encourage survivors to adopt healthier lifestyles. Finally, we discuss approaches to assessing health-related quality of life in cancer survivors, and the use of cancer registries in conducting psychosocial survivorship research. We highlight research and practice priorities in each of these areas. While the priorities vary per topic, common themes that emerged included: (1) Symptoms should not be viewed in isolation, but rather as part of a cluster of interrelated symptoms. This has implications for both understanding the aetiology of symptoms and for their treatment; (2) Psychosocial interventions need to be evidence-based, and where possible should be tailored to the needs of the individual cancer survivor. Relatively low cost interventions with self-management and e-Health elements may be appropriate for the majority of survivors, with resource intensive interventions being reserved for those most in need; (3) More effort should be devoted to disseminating and implementing interventions in practice, and to evaluating their cost-effectiveness; and (4) Greater attention should be paid to the needs of vulnerable and high-risk populations of survivors, including the socioeconomically disadvantaged and the elderly.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Neil K Aaronson
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Vittorio Mattioli
- O.U. Anesthesiology, Intensive Care, Pain and Palliative Care, Experimental Unit of Psycho-Oncology, National Cancer Research Center 'Giovanni Paolo II', Bari, Italy
| | - Ollie Minton
- Palliative Medicine, Division of Population Health Sciences and Education, St. George's University of London, London, United Kingdom
| | - Joachim Weis
- Department of Psychosocial Oncology, Clinic for Tumor Biology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
| | - Christoffer Johansen
- Cancer Late Effects Research, Oncology, Finsencenteret, RIgshospitalet, University of Copenhagen & Danish Cancer Society Research Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Susanne O Dalton
- Unit of Survivorship Research, The Danish Cancer Society Research Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Irma M Verdonck-de Leeuw
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, VU University Medical Center and Department of Clinical Psychology, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Kevin D Stein
- Behavioral Research Center, Intramural Research Department, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Catherine M Alfano
- Office of Cancer Survivorship, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health (NIH)/Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), Bethesda, MD, USA
| | - Anja Mehnert
- Section of Psychosocial Oncology, Department of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Angela de Boer
- Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lonneke V van de Poll-Franse
- Centre of Research on Psychology in Somatic Diseases (CoRPS), Tilburg University, Comprehensive Cancer Centre of the Netherlands, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
van Leeuwen M, Efficace F, Fosså SD, Bolla M, De Giorgi U, de Wit R, Holzner B, van de Poll-Franse LV, van Poppel H, White J, Collette L, Osanto S, Aaronson NK. Recruiting long-term survivors of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer phase III clinical trials into quality of life studies: challenges and opportunities. Eur J Cancer 2014; 50:1957-63. [PMID: 24820932 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.04.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2014] [Accepted: 04/16/2014] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES In this pilot study we evaluated the feasibility of and methods for assessing the quality of life of long term survivors of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) phase III clinical trials. Here we report the results pertaining to the feasibility of conducting such research. METHODS In this cross-sectional study, we recruited long-term, disease-free survivors from two mature EORTC clinical trials in testicular and prostate cancer from centres in Northern and Southern Europe, and the United Kingdom (UK). RESULTS A number of challenges were encountered in recruiting participating centres, obtaining medical ethical approval and in recruiting survivors and collecting the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data in a timely manner. The efficiency with which the study could be conducted varied widely across centres and countries. Time to obtain medical ethical approval for the study ranged from 1.5 to 25 months. We encountered most problems with ethical approval in the UK, Italy and Belgium. In most cases, data collection was completed within 3 months (range 10 weeks-1 year). Completed questionnaires were obtained from 68% and 56%, respectively, of the testicular and prostate cancer survivors who were approached. CONCLUSIONS HRQoL research among long-term survivors of EORTC phase III clinical trials is possible, but the process of ethical approval and data collection is a lengthy one. To minimise many of the logistical problems, long-term follow-up of patients should be an integral part of future clinical trials. Moreover, regulations governing medical ethical approval for clinical research within the EU should be carefully evaluated to facilitate long-term follow-up of cancer survivors in Europe.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marieke van Leeuwen
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Fabio Efficace
- Health Outcomes Research Unit, Italian Group for Adult Hematologic Diseases (GIMEMA) Data Center, Rome, Italy
| | - Sophie D Fosså
- Department of Clinical Cancer Research, Rikshospitalet-Radiumhospitalet Medical Center, Oslo, Norway
| | - Michel Bolla
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire A Michallon, Grenoble, France
| | - Ugo De Giorgi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) - IRCCS, Meldola, Italy
| | - Ronald de Wit
- Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC University Hospital and the ErasmusMC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bernhard Holzner
- Department of Psychiatry, Innsbruck University Hospital, Innsbruck, Austria
| | | | | | - Jeff White
- The Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Center, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom(1)
| | | | - Susanne Osanto
- Department of Clinical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Neil K Aaronson
- Division of Psychosocial Research and Epidemiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Lindahl-Jacobsen L, Hansen DG, la Cour K, Søndergaard J. Evaluation of a complex intervention to improve activities of daily living of disabled cancer patients: protocol for a randomised controlled study and feasibility of recruitment and intervention. BMC Health Serv Res 2014; 14:194. [PMID: 24779438 PMCID: PMC4045894 DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-194] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2013] [Accepted: 04/24/2014] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Many cancer patients have problems performing activities of daily living (ADL). A randomised controlled trial was designed to examine the effects of an ADL intervention in addition to standard treatment and care in a hospital setting. The objective of this article was to present the study and to analyse the feasibility of the recruitment process and the intervention. Methods Adult disabled cancer patients at Næstved Hospital in Denmark were enrolled between 1 March 2010 and 30 June 2011 and randomised into an ADL intervention or to a control group. The intervention was performed by occupational therapists. The feasibility of the recruitment was analysed with regard to success in achieving the estimated number of participants and identification of barriers, and feasibility of the intervention was based on calculations of patient attendance and patient acceptability. The primary outcome of the randomised controlled trial was patients’ health-related quality of life 2 and 8 weeks after baseline. Results A total of 118 disabled cancer patients were enrolled in the study over a time span of 16 months. Very few meetings between occupational therapist and patient were cancelled. Time spent on the intervention varied considerably, but for the majority of patients, time consumption was between 1–3 hours. Conclusions Despite difficulties with recruitment, participation was considered feasible and the intervention was accepted among patients. Missing data in the follow-up period were mostly due to death among participants. Very few participants declined to complete questionnaires during follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Line Lindahl-Jacobsen
- Research Unit of General Practice, Institute of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, JB Winsløws Vej 9A, Odense C 5000, Denmark.
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
22
|
Henry NL, Henry LN, Hayes DF, Ramsey SD, Hortobagyi GN, Barlow WE, Gralow JR. Promoting quality and evidence-based care in early-stage breast cancer follow-up. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014; 106:dju034. [PMID: 24627271 PMCID: PMC4311189 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju034] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2013] [Revised: 12/30/2013] [Accepted: 01/02/2014] [Indexed: 01/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Evidence-based guidelines for long-term follow-up of early-stage breast cancer patients developed by oncology societies in the United States and Europe recommend that breast cancer survivors undergo regular evaluation with history and physical examination, as well as annual mammography. Routine blood tests, circulating tumor markers, and/or surveillance imaging studies beyond mammography are not recommended in the absence of concerning symptoms or physical examination findings because of lack of supportive clinical evidence. Despite these guidelines, studies have shown that 20% to 40% of oncologists assess serum tumor markers as part of routine monitoring of early-stage breast cancer patients. As part of efforts to both address the financial challenges confronting the health-care system and optimize patient outcomes, the American Society of Clinical Oncology's Cost of Care Task Force identified adherence to breast cancer surveillance guidelines as an opportunity to improve care and reduce cost. However, these recommendations are based on trials done in an era of outdated technology and limited therapeutic options. It is possible that recent improvements in diagnostics and treatments could make earlier detection of recurrent disease important for improving both survival and quality of life outcomes. Research is necessary to further inform optimal breast cancer follow-up strategies, which could impact these recommendations. At this time, outside of well-conducted clinical trials, there is no role for ordering routine serial blood or imaging tests in monitoring for recurrence in early-stage breast cancer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Lynn N Henry
- Affiliations of authors: Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI (NLH, DFH); Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA (SDR, JRG); Department of Breast Medical Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX (GNH); Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA (WEB)
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
23
|
Paul C, Courtney R, Sanson-Fisher R, Carey M, Hill D, Simmons J, Rose S. A randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of a pre-recruitment primer letter to increase participation in a study of colorectal screening and surveillance. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014. [PMID: 24690533 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-44:10.1186/1471-2288-14-44] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recruiting cancer patients is a barrier often encountered in research trials. However, very few randomized trials explore strategies to improve participation rates. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a pre-recruitment primer letter to recruit persons diagnosed with colorectal cancer for a research trial. METHODS Potentially eligible participants were identified by the Victorian Cancer Registry. A total of 1,062 participants were randomized to receive either a mailed explanatory primer letter designed to encourage research participation, or no primer letter. Two weeks after the intervention, the Victorian Cancer Registry sought permission from patients to release their contact details to researchers. Those who agreed were contacted and invited to the study. RESULTS Pre-recruitment encouragement was not effective at increasing recruitment, with no significant differences demonstrated between experimental groups. Overall, 40% (n = 425) consented to participate, 25% (n = 243) refused and 35% (n = 394) did not respond. CONCLUSIONS While this study demonstrated disappointing outcomes, pre-recruitment letters should not be ruled out as an approach altogether. Rather, future research should explore whether other factors to increase motivation, such as intensity and timing, are feasible and acceptable for contacting cancer patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12609000628246.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christine Paul
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour (PRCHB), University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
24
|
Paul C, Courtney R, Sanson-Fisher R, Carey M, Hill D, Simmons J, Rose S. A randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of a pre-recruitment primer letter to increase participation in a study of colorectal screening and surveillance. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014; 14:44. [PMID: 24690533 PMCID: PMC3975453 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-44] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/11/2013] [Accepted: 03/27/2014] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Recruiting cancer patients is a barrier often encountered in research trials. However, very few randomized trials explore strategies to improve participation rates. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a pre-recruitment primer letter to recruit persons diagnosed with colorectal cancer for a research trial. METHODS Potentially eligible participants were identified by the Victorian Cancer Registry. A total of 1,062 participants were randomized to receive either a mailed explanatory primer letter designed to encourage research participation, or no primer letter. Two weeks after the intervention, the Victorian Cancer Registry sought permission from patients to release their contact details to researchers. Those who agreed were contacted and invited to the study. RESULTS Pre-recruitment encouragement was not effective at increasing recruitment, with no significant differences demonstrated between experimental groups. Overall, 40% (n = 425) consented to participate, 25% (n = 243) refused and 35% (n = 394) did not respond. CONCLUSIONS While this study demonstrated disappointing outcomes, pre-recruitment letters should not be ruled out as an approach altogether. Rather, future research should explore whether other factors to increase motivation, such as intensity and timing, are feasible and acceptable for contacting cancer patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12609000628246.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christine Paul
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour (PRCHB), University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI), New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
| | - Ryan Courtney
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour (PRCHB), University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI), New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
| | - Rob Sanson-Fisher
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour (PRCHB), University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI), New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
| | - Mariko Carey
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour (PRCHB), University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI), New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
| | - David Hill
- Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, The Cancer Council Victoria, Carlton, VIC, Australia
- Professorial Fellow, University of Melbourne, Parkville, VIC, Australia
| | - Jody Simmons
- Cancer Prevention Centre, The Cancer Council Victoria, Carlton, VIC, Australia
| | - Shiho Rose
- Priority Research Centre for Health Behaviour (PRCHB), University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
- Hunter Medical Research Institute (HMRI), New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
25
|
Bellury L, Ellington L, Beck SL, Pett MA, Clark J, Stein K. Older breast cancer survivors: can interaction analyses identify vulnerable subgroups? A report from the American Cancer Society Studies of Cancer Survivors. Oncol Nurs Forum 2014; 40:325-36. [PMID: 23803266 DOI: 10.1188/13.onf.325-336] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES To explore interactions among personal, cancer, aging, and symptom variables relative to physical function (PF) in older adult breast cancer survivors to better identify vulnerable subgroups. DESIGN Secondary analysis of the American Cancer Society Studies of Cancer Survivors II. SETTING U.S. population-based mail and telephone survey. SAMPLE 2,885 breast cancer survivors from 14 different state cancer registries stratified by cancer type and time since diagnosis. A total of 184 female breast cancer survivors, aged 70 years or older, had complete data on variables of interest and were, therefore, included in this analysis. METHODS Chi-Square Automatic Interaction Detector (CHAID) analysis was used to examine variable interactions. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES PF, symptom bother, comorbidity, social support, length of survivorship, treatment, stage, body mass index, physical activity, emotional health, and personal characteristics. FINDINGS An interaction effect between symptom bother and comorbidity was found in 39% of older adult breast cancer survivors, and an interaction effect between symptom bother and marital status was found in 40%. The most vulnerable group (8%) had high symptom bother and more than four comorbid conditions. CONCLUSIONS Symptom bother, comorbidity, and marital status were found to have significant interactions such that high comorbidity and high symptom bother were significantly related to lower PF. Married participants with lower symptom bother had significantly higher PF scores. Comorbidity may be the best predictor of PF for the extreme ends of the symptom bother continuum. Advancing age alone was not a sufficient predictor of PF in this analysis. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING Specific attention to symptom reports, comorbidity, and marital status can guide identification of older adult cancer survivors in need of ongoing survivorship care. The findings support use of a comprehensive assessment and tailored approach to care based on factors other than age. KNOWLEDGE TRANSLATION CHAID interaction analysis may be useful in exploring complex nursing problems, such as the needs of older adult cancer survivors, and help oncology nurses develop appropriate interventions and referrals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lanell Bellury
- Georgia Baptist College of Nursing, Mercer University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
26
|
Rowland JH, Kent EE, Forsythe LP, Loge JH, Hjorth L, Glaser A, Mattioli V, Fosså SD. Cancer survivorship research in Europe and the United States: where have we been, where are we going, and what can we learn from each other? Cancer 2013; 119 Suppl 11:2094-108. [PMID: 23695922 PMCID: PMC3690309 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.28060] [Citation(s) in RCA: 75] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/27/2012] [Revised: 01/16/2013] [Accepted: 01/16/2013] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
The growing number of cancer survivors worldwide has led to of the emergence of diverse survivorship movements in the United States and Europe. Understanding the evolution of cancer survivorship within the context of different political and health care systems is important for identifying the future steps that need to be taken and collaborations needed to promote research among and enhance the care of those living after cancer. The authors first review the history of survivorship internationally and important related events in both the United States and Europe. Lessons learned from survivorship research are then broadly discussed, followed by examination of the infrastructure needed to sustain and advance this work, including platforms for research, assessment tools, and vehicles for the dissemination of findings. Future perspectives concern the identification of collaborative opportunities for investigators in Europe and the United States to accelerate the pace of survivorship science going forward.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Julia H Rowland
- Office of Cancer Survivorship, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health/Department of Health and Human Services, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-7397, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
27
|
Glaser AW, Fraser LK, Corner J, Feltbower R, Morris EJA, Hartwell G, Richards M, Wagland R. Patient-reported outcomes of cancer survivors in England 1-5 years after diagnosis: a cross-sectional survey. BMJ Open 2013; 3:bmjopen-2012-002317. [PMID: 23578682 PMCID: PMC3641492 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2012-002317] [Citation(s) in RCA: 87] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To determine the feasibility of collecting population-based patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in assessing quality of life (QoL) to inform the development of a national PROMs programme for cancer and to begin to describe outcomes in a UK cohort of survivors. DESIGN Cross-sectional postal survey of cancer survivors using a population-based sampling approach. SETTING English National Health Service. PARTICIPANTS 4992 breast, colorectal, prostate and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) survivors 1-5 years from diagnosis. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES Implementation issues, response rates, cancer-specific morbidities utilising items including the EQ5D, tumour-specific subscales of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy and Social Difficulties Inventory. RESULTS 3300 (66%) survivors returned completed questionnaires. The majority aged 85+ years did not respond and the response rates were lower for those from more deprived area. Response rates did not differ by gender, time since diagnosis or cancer type. The presence of one or more long-term conditions was associated with significantly lower QoL scores. Individuals from most deprived areas reported lower QoL scores and poorer outcomes on other measures, as did those self-reporting recurrent disease or uncertainty about disease status. QoL scores were comparable at all time points for all cancers except NHL. QoL scores were lower than those from the general population in Health Survey for England (2008) and General Practice Patient Survey (2012). 47% of patients reported fear of recurrence, while 20% reported moderate or severe difficulties with mobility or usual activities. Bowel and urinary problems were common among colorectal and prostate patients. Poor bowel and bladder control were significantly associated with lower QoL. CONCLUSIONS This method of assessing QoL of cancer survivors is feasible and acceptable to most survivors. Routine collection of national population-based PROMs will enable the identification of, and the support for, the specific needs of survivors while allowing for comparison of outcome by service provider.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Adam W Glaser
- Department of Paediatric Oncology, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, Leeds, UK
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
28
|
Elena JW, Travis LB, Simonds NI, Ambrosone CB, Ballard-Barbash R, Bhatia S, Cerhan JR, Hartge P, Heist RS, Kushi LH, Lash TL, Morton LM, Onel K, Pierce JP, Robison LL, Rowland JH, Schrag D, Sellers TA, Seminara D, Shu XO, Thomas NE, Ulrich CM, Freedman AN. Leveraging epidemiology and clinical studies of cancer outcomes: recommendations and opportunities for translational research. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012. [PMID: 23197494 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djs473] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Abstract
As the number of cancer survivors continues to grow, research investigating the factors that affect cancer outcomes, such as disease recurrence, risk of second malignant neoplasms, and the late effects of cancer treatments, becomes ever more important. Numerous epidemiologic studies have investigated factors that affect cancer risk, but far fewer have addressed the extent to which demographic, lifestyle, genomic, clinical, and psychosocial factors influence cancer outcomes. To identify research priorities as well as resources and infrastructure needed to advance the field of cancer outcomes and survivorship research, the National Cancer Institute sponsored a workshop titled "Utilizing Data from Cancer Survivor Cohorts: Understanding the Current State of Knowledge and Developing Future Research Priorities" on November 3, 2011, in Washington, DC. This commentary highlights recent findings presented at the workshop, opportunities to leverage existing data, and recommendations for future research, data, and infrastructure needed to address high priority clinical and research questions. Multidisciplinary teams that include epidemiologists, clinicians, biostatisticians, and bioinformaticists will be essential to facilitate future cancer outcome studies focused on improving clinical care of cancer patients, identifying those at high risk of poor outcomes, and implementing effective interventions to ultimately improve the quality and duration of survival.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Joanne W Elena
- Clinical and Translational Epidemiology Branch, DCCPS 6130 Executive Blvd, rm 5136 Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
29
|
Vangeest JB, Johnson TP. Using incentives in surveys of cancer patients: do "best practices" apply? Cancer Causes Control 2012; 23:2047-52. [PMID: 23076587 DOI: 10.1007/s10552-012-0082-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2012] [Accepted: 10/05/2012] [Indexed: 11/27/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE Surveys of cancer patients are an important means of collecting data necessary to improve cancer prevention and control. However, health surveys generally are characterized by declining response rates, with incentives often employed to encourage participation. While successful, magnitude of effect is partially dependent upon situational characteristics of respondents, including health status. Given the health challenges experienced by cancer patients, it is unclear to what extent incentives can improve survey participation. In this study, we examine the effectiveness of monetary and non-monetary incentives in improving response to cancer patient surveys. METHODS We reviewed the available experimental literature regarding efforts to improve response rates among cancer patients/survivors via incentives. Relevant studies were identified through searches of the MEDLINE, PubMed, and PsychINFO databases from 1975 to 2012. Seed sources (e.g., Cancer Causes & Control, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, and BMC Medical Research Methodology) were also referenced extensively in order to establish a comprehensive set of studies. RESULTS Although limited, evidence does suggest that token incentives may be less effective for improving survey participation among cancer patients, relative to other population groups. These results are contrary to well-established evidence regarding the efficacy of incentives in improving survey participation generally. Potential reasons why incentives may be less effective in this population are explored. CONCLUSIONS While more research is necessary, results suggest that survey research strategies targeting cancer patients be purposively designed in a manner that gives consideration to the distress associated with the condition, including selection of alternative strategies to improve response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jonathan B Vangeest
- College of Public Health, Kent State University, P.O. Box 5190, Kent, OH 44242-0001, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|
30
|
Bhatia S, Blanco JG, Landier W, Relling MV. Reply to C.D. Atkins. J Clin Oncol 2012. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2012.44.8688] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
|
31
|
Cooney M, Galvin R, Connolly E, Stokes E. The International Classification of Functioning (ICF) Core Set for breast cancer from the perspective of women with the condition. Disabil Rehabil 2012; 35:740-8. [DOI: 10.3109/09638288.2012.707742] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/13/2022]
|
32
|
Kidwell KM, Yothers G, Ganz PA, Land SR, Ko CY, Cecchini RS, Kopec JA, Wolmark N. Long-term neurotoxicity effects of oxaliplatin added to fluorouracil and leucovorin as adjuvant therapy for colon cancer: results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trials C-07 and LTS-01. Cancer 2012; 118:5614-22. [PMID: 22569841 DOI: 10.1002/cncr.27593] [Citation(s) in RCA: 66] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2011] [Revised: 02/15/2012] [Accepted: 03/13/2012] [Indexed: 01/03/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neurotoxicity from adjuvant treatment with oxaliplatin has been studied in patients with colorectal carcinoma in short-term studies, but, to the authors' knowledge, the current article is the first long-term assessment which reports the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) investigation of whether excess neurotoxicity persists beyond 4 years. METHODS As part of a colorectal cancer long-term survivor study (LTS-01), long-term neurotoxicity was assessed in 353 patients on NSABP Protocol C-07 (cross-sectional sample). Ninety-two of these patients from LTS-01 also had longitudinal data and were reassessed 5 to 8 years (median, 7 years) after random assignment (longitudinal sample). Contingency tables compared cohorts, a mixed model compared neurotoxicity between treatments over time, and a Wilcoxon rank-sum test compared neurotoxicity between treatments (cross-sectional sample). RESULTS In the cross-sectional sample, the increase in mean total neurotoxicity scores of 1.8 with oxaliplatin was statistically significant (P = .005), but not clinically significant (a minimally important difference of 4 was reported at the long-term assessment). Patients who received oxaliplatin had increased odds of numbness and tingling in hands (odds ratio, 2.00; P = .015) and feet (odds ratio, 2.78; P < .001) versus patients who did not receive oxaliplatin. The magnitude of the oxaliplatin effect varied with time (P < .001) in the longitudinal sample, such that the oxaliplatin-treated group did not have significantly greater total neurotoxicity scores by 7 years. CONCLUSIONS At the long-term endpoint, there was no clinically significant increase in total neurotoxicity scores for patients who received oxaliplatin, but the specific neurotoxicities of numbness and tingling of the hands and feet remained significantly elevated for oxaliplatin-treated patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kelley M Kidwell
- National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Operations and Biostatistical Centers, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213, USA.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
33
|
Oeffinger KC, van Leeuwen FE, Hodgson DC. Methods to assess adverse health-related outcomes in cancer survivors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2012; 20:2022-34. [PMID: 21980010 DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.epi-11-0674] [Citation(s) in RCA: 17] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Designing a study focused on adverse health-related outcomes among cancer survivors is complex. Similarly, reading and interpreting the findings of a survivorship-focused study requires an appreciation of the complexities of study design, potential biases, confounding factors, and other limitations. The topic areas are broad--study design, comparison populations, measures of risk, key health outcomes of interest, potential modifying factors to consider. With brevity, this article includes basic information to consider within these areas as well as examples and concepts intended to advance the science of survivorship research and encourage further reading and exploration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kevin C Oeffinger
- Department of Pediatrics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY 10065, USA.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
34
|
Impact of chemotherapy on health status and symptom burden of colon cancer survivors: A population-based study. Eur J Cancer 2011; 47:1798-807. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.02.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2010] [Revised: 02/01/2011] [Accepted: 02/03/2011] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
35
|
Bellury LM, Ellington L, Beck SL, Stein K, Pett M, Clark J. Elderly cancer survivorship: an integrative review and conceptual framework. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2011; 15:233-42. [PMID: 21530396 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejon.2011.03.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 28] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2010] [Revised: 03/22/2011] [Accepted: 03/25/2011] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
UNLABELLED The intersection of ageing and cancer in the phase of post-treatment survivorship represents a large and growing population with unique needs. PURPOSE The goal of this work is to review and integrate the current gerontology and oncology literature relevant to elderly cancer survivorship, to identify knowledge gaps and research opportunities and to propose a conceptual model to guide future research. The long-term, global goal is the prevention of morbidity and mortality in elderly cancer survivors by identification of vulnerable elders, maintenance of independence, tailoring of treatment, establishing intervention guidelines and planning for necessary resources within the entire trajectory of cancer survival for older survivors. METHODS Targeted and integrative review of selected literature from multiple disciplines. Search engines included PubMed, article reference lists and internet searches for epidemiological data (US Census, World Health Organization, American Cancer Society, Canadian Cancer Cancer Society, etc). RESULTS A conceptual model that incorporates the gerontologic, oncologic and personal characteristics of older cancer survivors is proposed that may provide a comprehensive approach by which to frame elderly survivorship research. CONCLUSION Cancer survivorship among the elderly is quantitatively and qualitatively different from cancer survivorship among other age groups. The current large numbers and predicted increase in elderly cancer survivors in the near future mandate attention to this population. Future research must consider the complexity of intersecting needs in the gero-oncology population.
Collapse
|
36
|
Kunitake H, Zheng P, Yothers G, Land SR, Fehrenbacher L, Giguere JK, Wickerham DL, Wickerham L, Ganz PA, Ko CY. Routine preventive care and cancer surveillance in long-term survivors of colorectal cancer: results from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol LTS-01. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28:5274-9. [PMID: 21079140 DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.30.1903] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) protocol LTS-01 examines routine preventive care and cancer surveillance in long-term colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors previously treated in NSABP adjuvant trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS Long-term CRC survivors (≥5 years) from five completed NSABP trials (Protocols C-05, C-06, C-07, R-02, and R-03) at 60 study sites were recruited and surveyed using preventive health care items from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). A 3:1 comparison cohort case-matched by age, sex, race, and education was created from the 2005 NHIS. Contingency tables and multivariate models were used to compare cohorts and determine predictors of preventive care and cancer surveillance. RESULTS A total of 708 patients in protocol LTS-01 (681 patients with colon cancer, 27 patients with rectal cancer) completed the interview: 57.1% male, mean age 66.2 years (standard deviation=10.6), median survival 8 years. Patients in the LTS-01 protocol were more likely to have a usual source of health care (97.7% v 93.8%, P<.0001), have received a flu shot in the past 12 months (67.5% v 44.3%, P<.0001), and have undergone cancer screening by Pap smear (67.3% v 54.8%, P<.0001), mammogram (80.4% v 70.7%, P<.0001), and prostate-specific antigen test (84.5% v 74.5%, P<.0001) than patients in the NHIS cohort. For CRC surveillance, 96.5% of patients in protocol LTS-01 had a colonoscopy, 88.2% had a carcinoembryonic antigen test, and 66.4% had a computed tomography scan in the previous 5 years. Health insurance was the best predictor of cancer screening for all three methods (odds ratio=2.6 to 4.5). No factor was uniformly associated with CRC surveillance. CONCLUSION This select population of long-term CRC survivors who participated in clinical trials achieved better routine preventive care and cancer screening than the general population and high rates of cancer surveillance.
Collapse
|
37
|
Delanian S, Pradat PF. Posteriori Conformal Radiotherapy Using Three-Dimensional Dosimetric Reconstitution in a Survivor of Adult-Onset Hodgkin's Disease for Definitive Diagnosis of Lower Motor Neuron Disease. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28:e599-601. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.29.4272] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Sylvie Delanian
- Oncologie-Radiothérapie, Hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance Publique—Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| | - Pierre-Françcois Pradat
- Fédération des Maladies du Système Nerveux, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Assistance Publique—Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|